GameBanshee preview and interview

[hopfrog16]

You do keep loot and exp in online mode if I understand correctly. You can take that back to your own online campaign. I wish Obsidian could simply confirm this to stop further confusion. I know a lot of people on other forums who are interested in the game, but they won't believe me when I tell them that you can keep loot and exp in online mode. This has made them unsure of getting the game, because they trust the previews out there, and there is no official explanations. This is not good for the game, imho. I understand this might be part of marketing, slowly revealing new info until the game releases, but online co-op info really needs to be released very soon, because it is the reason more than a few people are unsure if they will be getting the game or not.

 

Surely it'd pertain only to the Co-Op game? If not you could start an easy Co-Op game max out your inventory gold etc then cart the trash & treasure back to a hard-core campaign. Isn't that borderline cheating or something? Okay persistent characters would work if we could get high level characters, DS1's Level 150 or DS2's 60 (I think) but DS3 is only going up to 20 or 30 right? How much persistence is required? Worst case scenario you max out the character in 2 play throughs.

 

In DS 1, the level cap was 200 for each skill I'm pretty sure (So technically, the highest you could get was level 200 melee, 200 ranged, 200 nature magic, and 200 combat magic... But this would be way too time consuming). As for dungeon siege 2, I think they halved the level cap to 100... But this time, you had a normal player level as well as a skill level. When the normal player level reached 100, you couldn't raise the other skill levels anymore as far as I know, but I may be wrong there... Was a long time ago.

 

I can almost guarantee that the new game won't use either leveling system... Especially since the players are weapon locked. To be honest, though, I think that may be a good thing.

[Tigranes]

I increasingly suspect that simply put, DS3 is not a game where you take a single character and spend a hundred hours getting them up to level 100 or something, but a game where you play the campaign from start to finish, then if you want have another go with a different character. i.e. Spend 20 hours on a co-op campaign with Lucas till level 20-30, finish, maybe start another game with another Lucas or a different person.

 

That would make so much more sense - in that case of course you'd tie characters to specific games, because there's no point importing a maxxed Lucas somewhere else anyway. It might disappoint those who want a Diablo style semi-persistent MP, but I don't mind too much - that does fit in very well with what looks like a campaign that encourages more story and replayability, a huge, huge focus on co-op (which works much better when you have people going through one campaign together at the same level than a random level 17 and a random level 6 grinding mobs wherever they get the best XP), etc.

[hopfrog16]

I increasingly suspect that simply put, DS3 is not a game where you take a single character and spend a hundred hours getting them up to level 100 or something, but a game where you play the campaign from start to finish, then if you want have another go with a different character. i.e. Spend 20 hours on a co-op campaign with Lucas till level 20-30, finish, maybe start another game with another Lucas or a different person.

 

That would make so much more sense - in that case of course you'd tie characters to specific games, because there's no point importing a maxxed Lucas somewhere else anyway. It might disappoint those who want a Diablo style semi-persistent MP, but I don't mind too much - that does fit in very well with what looks like a campaign that encourages more story and replayability, a huge, huge focus on co-op (which works much better when you have people going through one campaign together at the same level than a random level 17 and a random level 6 grinding mobs wherever they get the best XP), etc.

 

I think this was a bad direction to take the game in my own personal opinion. You say it may disappoint those looking for a "Diablo style semi-persistant MP", but that's what Dungeon Siege (multiplayer) was about. =P Taking the characters you build and going on loot runs/exploring with friends/EXP runs... At least that's what I did. What's the point of playing a game you've beaten online with friends if the only reason to play is to rehash a story you already know the ending to? It didn't work for fable 2-3 and it wouldn't work for this game either (or at least those are my suspicions)...

 

Developers could definitely make a different map for multiplayer that's less about story and more about the endgame multiplayer content... That's what the first game did (although they allowed you to play the singleplayer maps as well as the multiplayer maps online). When I was finished with the single player game, I would import my character to multiplayer and continue the game there. It just seems odd that a loot centric dungeon crawler wouldn't have much in the way of endgame material... In fact, I can't really think of another loot centric dungeon crawler that doesn't have endgame material off the top of my head. =P

 

Don't get me wrong... I think this will be a great game, and I will pre-order it for sure. =) I'm just a bit disappointed with what I hear about the end-game...

[rc deaths agent]

I increasingly suspect that simply put, DS3 is not a game where you take a single character and spend a hundred hours getting them up to level 100 or something, but a game where you play the campaign from start to finish, then if you want have another go with a different character. i.e. Spend 20 hours on a co-op campaign with Lucas till level 20-30, finish, maybe start another game with another Lucas or a different person.

 

That would make so much more sense - in that case of course you'd tie characters to specific games, because there's no point importing a maxxed Lucas somewhere else anyway. It might disappoint those who want a Diablo style semi-persistent MP, but I don't mind too much - that does fit in very well with what looks like a campaign that encourages more story and replayability, a huge, huge focus on co-op (which works much better when you have people going through one campaign together at the same level than a random level 17 and a random level 6 grinding mobs wherever they get the best XP), etc.

 

I think this was a bad direction to take the game in my own personal opinion. You say it may disappoint those looking for a "Diablo style semi-persistant MP", but that's what Dungeon Siege (multiplayer) was about. =P Taking the characters you build and going on loot runs/exploring with friends/EXP runs... At least that's what I did. What's the point of playing a game you've beaten online with friends if the only reason to play is to rehash a story you already know the ending to? It didn't work for fable 2-3 and it wouldn't work for this game either (or at least those are my suspicions)...

 

Developers could definitely make a different map for multiplayer that's less about story and more about the endgame multiplayer content... That's what the first game did (although they allowed you to play the singleplayer maps as well as the multiplayer maps online). When I was finished with the single player game, I would import my character to multiplayer and continue the game there. It just seems odd that a loot centric dungeon crawler wouldn't have much in the way of endgame material... In fact, I can't really think of another loot centric dungeon crawler that doesn't have endgame material off the top of my head. =P

 

Don't get me wrong... I think this will be a great game, and I will pre-order it for sure. =) I'm just a bit disappointed with what I hear about the end-game...

I'm with ya..If (and thats a big if) there is no kind of persistant multiplayer to loot and level with your friends this will be a rental for the story and i'll chalk it up to a co-op action game.

 

I hope it's more than that though because i really want a co-op dungeon crawler to play with friends.

[Mephster]

Well I'm not going to criticize too much because I don't think online multiplayer has been explained only single player and local co-op so far ? I don't mind going through the main

story multiple times as long as I can find alot of loot so I can customize my characters.

[C2B]

Machinima Preview

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiGhU7CP0sQ..._medium=twitter

[Oblarg]

Cool footage. Loving the graphics, and some of those sword attacks look awesomely visceral.

Edited March 15, 2011 by Oblarg

[Lord Elvewyn]

Agreed. More akin to a one time watch movie. Seen it yes\no move on and forget about it. I played DS1 for ages and still have fond memories of it. I don't want a 1 day console wonder for my PC.

 

 

I increasingly suspect that simply put, DS3 is not a game where you take a single character and spend a hundred hours getting them up to level 100 or something, but a game where you play the campaign from start to finish, then if you want have another go with a different character. i.e. Spend 20 hours on a co-op campaign with Lucas till level 20-30, finish, maybe start another game with another Lucas or a different person.

 

That would make so much more sense - in that case of course you'd tie characters to specific games, because there's no point importing a maxxed Lucas somewhere else anyway. It might disappoint those who want a Diablo style semi-persistent MP, but I don't mind too much - that does fit in very well with what looks like a campaign that encourages more story and replayability, a huge, huge focus on co-op (which works much better when you have people going through one campaign together at the same level than a random level 17 and a random level 6 grinding mobs wherever they get the best XP), etc.

 

I think this was a bad direction to take the game in my own personal opinion. You say it may disappoint those looking for a "Diablo style semi-persistant MP", but that's what Dungeon Siege (multiplayer) was about. =P Taking the characters you build and going on loot runs/exploring with friends/EXP runs... At least that's what I did. What's the point of playing a game you've beaten online with friends if the only reason to play is to rehash a story you already know the ending to? It didn't work for fable 2-3 and it wouldn't work for this game either (or at least those are my suspicions)...

 

Developers could definitely make a different map for multiplayer that's less about story and more about the endgame multiplayer content... That's what the first game did (although they allowed you to play the singleplayer maps as well as the multiplayer maps online). When I was finished with the single player game, I would import my character to multiplayer and continue the game there. It just seems odd that a loot centric dungeon crawler wouldn't have much in the way of endgame material... In fact, I can't really think of another loot centric dungeon crawler that doesn't have endgame material off the top of my head. =P

 

Don't get me wrong... I think this will be a great game, and I will pre-order it for sure. =) I'm just a bit disappointed with what I hear about the end-game...

I'm with ya..If (and thats a big if) there is no kind of persistant multiplayer to loot and level with your friends this will be a rental for the story and i'll chalk it up to a co-op action game.

 

I hope it's more than that though because i really want a co-op dungeon crawler to play with friends.

[C2B]

Agreed. More akin to a one time watch movie. Seen it yes\no move on and forget about it. I played DS1 for ages and still have fond memories of it. I don't want a 1 day console wonder for my PC.

 

In fact I'm sure it won't be like this.

 

 

Akso did we suddenly somehow establish that there is no endgame, Level 30 is easy to reach and standard co-op is the only multiplayer modus?

Edited March 15, 2011 by C2B

[funcroc]

Siliconera: Dungeon Siege III

[rafoca]

I was reading some of the youtube comments (based on the link above) of people saying this game should be on consoles. The argument was based on the fact the game has changed.

 

Well... games change because of developers decisions, not to acommodate on consoles. Torchlight remains the same game even now it is playable on XBOX. People don

Edited March 15, 2011 by rafoca

[Lord Elvewyn]

Agreed. More akin to a one time watch movie. Seen it yes\no move on and forget about it. I played DS1 for ages and still have fond memories of it. I don't want a 1 day console wonder for my PC.

 

In fact I'm sure it won't be like this.

 

 

Akso did we suddenly somehow establish that there is no endgame, Level 30 is easy to reach and standard co-op is the only multiplayer modus?

 

No endgame?

 

I think the level 30 or whatever has been implied. One play through per character and 'game over man'.

 

Standard Co-Op is the only multiplayer mode mentioned. Hopefully there's more but there's been no hint as yet.

[C2B]

Agreed. More akin to a one time watch movie. Seen it yes\no move on and forget about it. I played DS1 for ages and still have fond memories of it. I don't want a 1 day console wonder for my PC.

 

In fact I'm sure it won't be like this.

 

 

Akso did we suddenly somehow establish that there is no endgame, Level 30 is easy to reach and standard co-op is the only multiplayer modus?

 

No endgame?

 

I think the level 30 or whatever has been implied. One play through per character and 'game over man'.

 

Standard Co-Op is the only multiplayer mode mentioned. Hopefully there's more but there's been no hint as yet.

 

Exactly. We have NO information regarding it. We have NO information how it exactly works in the end.

 

We know there is co-op and there are seperate charachters for online play. We know nothing else. Not how the lobby works, not what the multiplayer consists of.

 

Also Level 30? Yes. Easy to reach in one playthrough? No information.

I highly doubt it. At least not without grinding.

Edited March 16, 2011 by C2B

[WorstUsernameEver]

New IGN PC Preview that reads like a summary.

They keep saying that you can't save progress in every multiplayer mode which contradicts the Destructoid article. PR department really REALLY should start to clarify things, considering one of the game's main selling points is multiplayer...

[C2B]

New IGN PC Preview that reads like a summary.

They keep saying that you can't save progress in every multiplayer mode which contradicts the Destructoid article. PR department really REALLY should start to clarify things, considering one of the game's main selling points is multiplayer...

 

*Facepalm*

 

This reads like IGN is interviewing themselves. Which they probably do..... *Double Facepalm*

 

The questions aren't any better since to answer them they would require knowdlegde that the IGN guys do not have at this point.

 

 

Like:

 

Whats the craziest thing in the game?

 

or how they answer to the question "How many loots will I collect".

 

 

Hey guys, like 15 minutes of research or so and you wouldn't just have a rough number but even know that many of them are randomly generated from archetypes with several uniques.

 

 

But hey,.... "Research".... Thats too much to ask from gaming journalism.

Edited March 16, 2011 by C2B

[WorstUsernameEver]

Gameplay footage from an old build (we've already seen it, but mostly spliced/with pauses and voice-overs):

 

Giga.de preview:

[C2B]

Nathaniel on Something Awful

 

This Wednesday, I did a segment on Xplay that should be playing sometime soon. Morgan Webb said I convinced her to buy the game (off camera)

 

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthrea...mp;pagenumber=4

Edited March 17, 2011 by C2B

[Lord Elvewyn]

Oh by end game you meant end product. I was thinking ingame end game, which obviously we know squat about.

 

Do we know there's separate characters for online play? My understanding is that there's 4 characters in a game. If you join a Co-Op you get to play one of the free characters. That's not separate. The instance of that character relates to that Co-Op but it's still the same characters. Separate would be if instead of Luke, Angel, Gungirl & Alchemist you play Sam the Scientist, Pete the Pirate, Bill the Butcher etc, or the class equivalents.

 

Lobby issues have never crossed my mind. At this stage Co-Op IS the multiplayer. There's what 6 weeks 'til the game's released? IF there's real multiplayer they need to say. I quite probably won't play multiplayer for the multiplayer component but I did spend a lot of time in DS1's multiplayer world building my character\exploring the world. If 30 levels and single player\Co-Op modes are all that's offered that's not going to be possible. I'm not complaing about including a Co-op mode, that's cool, and the Serious Sam series is about the only other one off the top of my head that I can think of that offers Co-Op as distinct from multiplayer but still ...

 

Level 30? Easy may be the wrong word but I wouldn't call doing every side mission\exploring the world to its fullest grinding. Grinding is killing respawning monsters\playing the same level over and over and over and ... again to get XP. Maybe level 30 will be just out of reach on one play through (I'm thinking vanilla Mass Effect 2 here) but you can get very close. If you had to play through the game twice or even just 1.5 time it'd be ridiculous. That'd mean you can only reach level 20 maximum on a single play through. The only way that could be justified, and I'm speculating wildly here, is if there's an unlockable "Heart of Fury" or whatever mode for high level\maxed out characters which provides a whole new tier of equipment and challenge. That might be cool but as I understand it it's one play through per character and various difficulty settings BUT no unlockable levels. At least I thought they'd been ruled out.

 

 

Exactly. We have NO information regarding it. We have NO information how it exactly works in the end.

 

We know there is co-op and there are seperate charachters for online play. We know nothing else. Not how the lobby works, not what the multiplayer consists of.

 

Also Level 30? Yes. Easy to reach in one playthrough? No information.

I highly doubt it. At least not without grinding.

[Tigranes]

Do we know there's separate characters for online play?

 

Zero info one way or the other. Any "info" out there about this is speculation.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Rock, Paper, Shotgun sort-of-preview piece.

 

Quinns: I

[C2B]

Rock, Paper, Shotgun sort-of-preview piece.

 

Quinns: I’ve been asking some questions of sinister men in dark alleys since then, and have discovered that some of the original Dark Alliance devs are even on the team making DS3.

 

Well, not exactly. Avellone was on DA1 and Champions as a designer and Black Isle did DA2. Were there others on DA1?

 

 

Edit: Nope, just Avellone.

Edited March 18, 2011 by C2B

[Wrath of Dagon]

This guy is quoting me

Obsidian has earned my interest whatever it is, really. Their games are rough while often not being ready, but I almost always enjoy them.

Oh, wait, I'm quoting him.

 

Really I wasn't even going to get DS3 at first, and still wouldn't get an action RPG from any other developer, but I'm kind of excited about DS3 now.

[funcroc]

G4: co-op hands-on preview

[MechanicalLemon]

G4: Dungeon Siege 3 Hands-On Preview

 

Youtube version

 

Just some co-op gameplay and some info about co-op dialogue.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Not that informative unfortunately.

 

Also...

 

Dungeon Siege is back, this 3rd chapter coming from Resident Evil: New Vegas' Obsidian Entertainment.

 

WHAT?!

 

P.S. : Completely OT, but kudos for your youtube channel MechanicalLemon.

 

EDIT: Ah, also, the interface looks slightly changed. Newer build again?

Edited March 29, 2011 by WorstUsernameEver